Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> I'm not sure it's possible to creating an xinclude(yes/no/noFallback)
> scheme using the XPointer Framework because of
[the fact that failing XPointer parts are consumed.]
A counter-argument could be devised based on the xmlns()
scheme. The sentences before Simon's quote include this
text:
> Note that an XPointer part that uses xmlns scheme never
> returns a sub-resource and thus always fails. However,
> its evaluation has a potential effect on XPointer parts
> to its right;
thus indicating that even "failing" XPointer parts can
affect the context for later XPointer parts, though they
themselves are "consumed". With this as precedent, it
does not seem far-fetched to claim that an
xinclude(yes/no/noFallback) scheme could affect the
context for later xpath1() scheme XPointer parts.
--
Kian-Tat Lim, ktl@ktlim.com, UTF-7: +Z5de+pBU-